Hi all, I have a data set containing shape, size (= centroid size), a fixed factor such species (three levels) and a fixed factor, nested within species, such generation (two levels). After having checked that interaction terms size*species and size*generation (species) were not significant, I would perform a size correction (= standardization) to my data in order to test for ontogenetic scaling and/or lateral transposition. I performed size correction to my data as follows.
i) At the intraspecific (static) level, I performed three separated standardization of data using the mean shape and size of each species. In all the species, the difference expressed as total sum of squares between data in shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the amount of shape variance explained by size. ii) At interspecific (evolutionary) level, using the full data set (not split per species) in shape space, I performed size correction using the grand mean shape and size. In this instance also, the difference expressed as total sum of squares between data in shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the amount of shape variance explained by size. Have I correctly performed size correction of nested data? Thanks in advance, Michele -- MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MORPHMET" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org.
